Sharing the dais with Gujarat leader, Manmohan Singh counters that the Iron Man was a Congressman

Narendra Modi, the BJP’s prime ministerial candidate for the 2014 elections, asserted here on Tuesday that post-Independence India would have been different had Sardar Patel been the country’s first Prime Minister. To this, Congress leader and Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, who shared the dais with Mr. Modi, responded that Vallabhbhai Patel was a truly secular Congress leader who stood for a united India.

They were speaking at a keenly watched function where Dr. Singh inaugurated a renovated and upgraded Sardar Patel Memorial Museum. The function was held under the aegis of the Sardar Patel Memorial Society chaired by Union Minister of State for Mines and Congress leader Dinsha Patel.

The speeches by the Prime Minister and the Gujarat Chief Minister came on the eve of the ground-breaking ceremony for a 182-metre statue of Sardar Patel, a prestigious project initiated by Mr. Modi, at Sadhu Bet, 3 km from the Sardar Sarovar dam site. The museum and statue projects are interpreted as a tussle between the Congress and the BJP to claim the Sardar Patel legacy.

Speaking as the chief guest, the Prime Minister made an indirect reference to a recent claim by Mr. Modi that Jawaharlal Nehru, who was the first Prime Minister, did not attend Sardar Patel’s funeral in 1950 and stated that the Iron Man spoke very highly of Nehru as a “respected friend and colleague” despite differences of opinion.

“[The] Sardar said it was his privilege to be able to advise Nehru on issues of governance and organisation and that Nehru would eagerly have his advice. Both immensely respected each other’s views and this is possible only between those who have faith in each other,” Dr. Singh said.

The Prime Minister went on: “Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Patel and Maulana Abul Kalam Azad were all secular, broad-minded, tolerant, had compassion for the poor and stood for a united India.”

Dr. Singh reminded the audience that “Sardar Patel belonged to the Congress and worked hard to strengthen the party as its president.” And then the Prime Minister said: “I too belong to the same party.”

Speaking earlier, Mr. Modi said it was time to learn from Sardar Patel’s hard work to preserve the country’s unity and integrity and to channel “some misguided youth” to shun “the gun and the bomb”.

“No community or country could benefit from violence, and it is time we take inspiration from Sardar Patel,” the Chief Minister said. He regretted that the Iron Man could not become the first Prime Minister.

The Chief Minister did not miss the opportunity to say that during the last decade, Gujarat has received nearly 200 awards for its achievements, including 90 from the UPA government. He thanked the Prime Minister for this.

Tuesday’s was a rare function in many years when Mr. Modi shared the dais with his Congress opponents, including his one-time BJP senior Shankersinh Vaghela, now Leader of the Opposition in the State Assembly.

It was also an unusual function in Gujarat where Mr. Modi’s photograph was conspicuous by its absence though he was a special guest. The background banner had the photographs of only Sardar Patel and the Prime Minister.

But, in keeping with the solemnity of the occasion, Mr. Modi was seen sharing banter with Dr. Singh as they sat together.

After this contoversy, at least people would be attracted to refer to the history to find facts. Sardar Patel was never given importance by the Congress, and now time has come that they have to do what they have not been doing since past many years.

from:
Jayesh Shah

Posted on: Nov 1, 2013 at 08:45 IST

PM's assertion is too peripheral, even Raj Mohan Gandhi expressed concern that Congress didn't do justice to Sardar Patel, his all important views were negated by Jawahar Lal Nehru., Goa, Kashmir, Somnath reconstruction, and many were issues at stake where their views were 180 degree, and none other than Maulana Azad was too straight in mentioning it clearly .. "âMy second mistake was that when I decided not to stand myself, I did not support Sardar Patel. We differed on many issues but I am convinced that if he had succeeded me as Congress President he would have seen that the Cabinet Mission Plan was successfully implemented. He would have never committed the mistake of Jawaharlal which gave Mr. Jinnah an opportunity of sabotaging the Plan. I can never forgive myself when I think that if I had not committed these mistakes, perhaps the history of the last ten years would have been different.â ~Maulan Abul Kalam Azad, India Win Freedom, p. 162.

from:
pramod gupta

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 15:03 IST

As per my knowledge patel was not against the partition and in view of the partition being imminent he wanted the minorities to leave India as their presence would carry a danger of recurring riots after independence. This ideology of patel was identical to the RSS and was the cause of differences between him, Nehru and other congressmen.
It was only after independence when riots took place he developed an anti RSS stance due to the violence and his submission to the fact that the minorities were to be an integral part of secular India. Its his pre-independence opinion that is referred to frequently by the BJP.
Some of his views were considered after his death like forceful annexation of Goa and sending force to Tibet during Chinese invasion.
It was his decisiveness and political judgement which on many instances considered better than that of Nehru's which makes us think that he might have proved a better PM than Nehru.

from:
satyender

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 12:55 IST

At last someone has said Sardar patel was from Congress, till now we all thought Congress was just Nehru-Indira-Rajiv-Sonia-Priyanka-Rahul.
I think the Statue of unity initiative by Modi has forced the renovation of museum and the comments from congress. I welcome more such initiative from others be it for Bose, Bhagat Singh, C Rajagopalachari, shastri etc....because congress never did it and they will never do it.

from:
Praveen Nair

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 12:55 IST

An occasion to pay tributes to a statesman of pre independence era should not be misused with an intention to find fault with what had happened in governance in a, so to say, a previous generation deliberately forgetting contemporary circumstances and conditions then existing. It is a shame that in anything and everything, modern politicians want to derive a political mileage!

from:
T V Padmanabhan

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 12:10 IST

This opinion was shared by thousands in 1946 onwards and Mahatma's
virtual "casting"vote made Shri.Nehru the first P.M.Inspite of all
pleasant" reportings the relationship between the two Titans were
NOT all sweet.The worst dishonour on the Sardar's legacy was the
capitulation of Panditji to the Satyagrahi Shri.Potti Sriramulu which caused the Creation of LINGUISTIC States.Parel Saab Created
a Union of India by uniting all Princely States-a Herculean effort-
but the Re Organisation of Indian States as Lingustic Entities
nullified the Unification achieved by the Iron Man.Instead of
warring Maharajas and small kingdoms we have States literally warring against each other on Borders,Water,Power,Cross Country Transport etc

from:
ajith kumar

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 12:01 IST

What is to be remembered is that Sardar Patel died in December 1950 and was quite ill for the one year before he died.Even if he had become the Prime Minister he would not have been able to make much of an impact because of his ill health and early demise.In any case Nehru would have been the natural successor to Patel.

from:
Sushil

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 11:41 IST

The RSS was still there even before independence. But, Sardar Patel never identified himself with that radical party. He was a Congressman whom Modi loves today! The Sardar unified India and fought the maiden war with the French, and brought in Goa to India. Modi knows half baked history and he cooks his own sour soup to feed the nation with his Hindutva curry. But, he is correct to that extent that if Sardar Patel were to become the first PM of India, surely the nation would have gone into a different path than it went with Nehru like how it would have been with my grandfather or that of Modi's. By the by, why Modi is not ready to blame Sardar Patel for all the allegation of corruption, dynasty rule by Congress? For, Sardar was also a part of the group of Congressmen brought in Nehru as PM. If Sardar were to become the PM, the Patel clan of Gujarat would have sucked every resource out of India. India would have been the delight of Peter Sellers block busters.

from:
C. Sachidananda Narayanan

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 11:03 IST

Sardar Patel and Mahatma Gandhi belongs to Congress whose objective to get freedom from Britishers. After freedom, Gandhi himself told to dissolve Congress. The current Congress PARTY is formed by Indira Gandhi around 1972. It is Congress(I).

from:
Jigar Mehta

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 10:46 IST

Very poor. Even such educated, respected, Prime Minister of India is telling Sardar Patel belonged to Congress party. Patel belonged to the congress party which got independence but not the ruling congress party. And Mahatma Gandhi said to dissolve the Congress party after independence - but it didnt happen till now. Patel belonged to India.

from:
Rajesh

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 09:58 IST

Congress then was a Nationalist movement that later turned into a political party and hence any nationalist at that time was a part of congress, it is very cynical of the PM to brand Sardar as a congressman and take the sheen away from him. Sardar is not a Congressman first and definitely not the present Congress but he belongs to the Nation. In that respect I don't find any wrong in Gujarat celebrating him and if it was not Gujarat, I doubt if Congress would even take notice of Sardar given their obsesion with everything Gandhi

from:
Kamal

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 09:36 IST

None of the political leaders remember Subash Chandra Bose, Bhagat Singh and other martyrs. It's very sad that we in India not even bother about the selfless sacrifice of these people. All the time we brag about Gandhi, Nehru and other INC people. Shame on the politicians.

from:
Vivek Mamidi

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 09:25 IST

I think we should delink Nehru from dynasty politics played by Indira Gandhi's family since 1970's. Nehru never willed his daughter to be made future Prime Minister. She destroyed the best of Congress to form her personal fiefdom Congress (Indira) which was wrongly rewarded by voters of 1970's & 80's. The blind Uttar Pradesh voter alongwith Indira's personal ambition led to destruction of our freedom fighter's dream of independent India

from:
Shaleen Mathur

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 08:59 IST

By saying that Sardar Patel would have been a better
Prime Minister, Mr.Modi is drawing opporobrium on himself. Among Modi's well wishers there are a good many who love and admire Nehruji, who in spite of some missteps, is a charismatic ,loveable man..Nehruji's contribution to India's growth needs no elaboration. This is a rather slippery area for an aspiring PM to venture into.
Watch out, Mr. Modi

from:
Sathya Pararth

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 08:52 IST

To the extent that the exchanges between the current and the aspiring PMs inspire the citizens and Indiaâs historians to re-visit the contribution of national leaders other than Nehru should be welcome.
That the Mahatma's surname has been commoditised into a highly valuable political brand is as deplorable as it is obvious. That INC never misses an opportunity to reaffirm its unquestioning subservience to one family, coupled with communist-USSR-style extreme-overuse of that family name (to market party brand?) by christening almost every publicly funded institution with the family name, have made both INC and Indian democracy an object of French-farce-type ridicule, at home and abroad.
A national leader represents the nation and belongs to the people, not to ANY one political party. During India's freedom struggle the leaders were sensible enough to unite as one party. Today's INC is as distant from the values of the pre-independence INC as RSS is the natural heir of Sardar Patelji.

from:
D Mahapatra

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 08:04 IST

Mr Manmohan Singh could have avoided harping on Patel being a Congressman. In preindepence India, there was no other party except Muslim League. Patel could not have been in the Muslim League. Of course, one may say there was the CPI but it was an unimportant entity. Even the founder of the Jan Sangh, Dr Syamaa Prasad Mukherjee was also a Congressman at that time. One cannot understand why he read out a highly sectarian speech on an occasion when his party has made a belated discovery of the merits of the sole architect and builder of a united India.

from:
S Srinivasan

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 07:59 IST

Sir, all agree with Mr,Modi that Sardar Patel Would have made a better PM. he compromised with Nehrus policy in accordance per Gandhis wish. there should not have been Kashmir and China issues if Patel was Prime minister.Nehru made everything mess for which we are suffering all these days.
And for the present Pm stating Sardar is congress man and secular(he renovated Somanath temple pride of HIndus),he must well remember that Congress is 100% different from the present one.

from:
kvl shanta

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 07:58 IST

I don't care who should have been or who the Prime Minister was then, but right now this country is in a mess with Congress and it will get more messier with BJP if they come to power.

from:
Alexander Thomas

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 07:30 IST

Indians world over know the present day Congress can never equate to the Gandhian era Congress. Today's Congress is too greedy for power and money, and has relegated national interests on the back burner. Plus, many of its members are viewed as corrupted with criminal backgrounds. MMS is making mockery of the erstwhile Congress from the independence days.

from:
Murali S

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 07:27 IST

Why did the Sardar Opt for The Indian National Congress instead of floating and promoting a faction of his own to make a bid for the fulfillment of his Prime Ministerial ambition?He was a real Sardar who didn't manipulate the unanimous choice of his party,the Congress, to decimate its stature and hence respected the choice as a true democrat. Nehru,Patel and Azad had a stronger link- tolerance for the difference of opinion- again a cardinal feature of the traditions of liberal democracy in India.To uphold them , in my humble opinion,is perhaps the best tribute we can offer to such luminaries as Nehru,Patel and others at opportune moments. How can one excel Patel without inculcating in himself/herself Patel's attributes and recorded legacy? Isn't it utter selfishness to misuse such names for our selfish ends? We must desist from them if we have scant regard for the departed leaders of the nation, we claim to be proud of.

from:
SK. GOLAM ALI

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 07:22 IST

Safdar Patel was a leader of India and petty politics wasn't his game. Gandhiji as the ultimate freedom leader chose Nehru and Patel for their national spirit in creating a One India.both played their roles Suited to their natures. Just as Shri Atalji was a man of vision and a liberal, quite different from the others in the party. One hopes that Modi sheds his arrogance and imbibes the true spirit as a leader of a united and secular India.

from:
S.N.Iyer

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 06:50 IST

What Modi said is true. There were Mahatma Gandhi and Nehru who were the perfect men to lead the effort to free India from British rule. But it was Sardar Patel who was the perfect man to unite and lead Independent India. We should be open to observations and criticisms and counter them in polite language and not abuse Modi verbally. India is undergoing a welcome change and history is being made - in that process lot of people are going be naturally confused and critical.

from:
Ramamurthy

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 06:30 IST

From iron man to Aluminium men. The era when Patel and Nehru were at helm of affairs is totally different from now.Now we are living in a period of politicians. This only reflects quality of people who select them.

from:
Raghu

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 06:13 IST

In a country where knowledge levels are abysmally low Narendra Modi would do well to refrain from quoting half unsubstantiated truths and misleading the general gullible public. He would do well to take a leaf out of the book of our respected learned scholarly Prime Minister who though speaks less still comes out with the correct facts of history.
It is a ridiculous after thought to think of Sardar Patel as the first prime minister after nearly 50 years of the Nehru has passed. Also the country does not require tallest statues to redeem the prestige of one of its stalwarts of the freedom movement. At this rate Mayawati would be put to shame in sycophancy. Let the money wasted on such pursuits be spent on much needed infrastructure a need which Narendra Modi could not be unaware of.There is a limit to vote bank politics. Hope he is learnt his lesson the hard way after Nitish Kumar has literally torn apart all his untruths uttered in the Hoonkar rally.

from:
R.VIJAYKUMAR

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 05:57 IST

Sardar Patel consolidated India and the whole nation acknowledges his contributions.
Panditji laid the foundation in a massive scale in the fields of education through the IIT's And the IIM's, in the Steel sector through giants plans with the help of the then developed Super powers, in agricultural sector by the construction of the biggest dams like the BHAKRA NANGAL dam. Apart from that, he introduced the concept of five year plans for The orderly development of India. These facts are clear as water is water, and the vast Population of India is well aware of these realities. He projected the image of India to the Outside world in a very large measure. Comparison of two tall giants of tester years, to Denigrate one leader, is quiet unbecoming in civilized society. India is the most populous Democracy in the world, and very high discipline in WORDS AND DEEDS is the need of The hour.

from:
C p Chandra das

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 05:26 IST

Yes, Modiji, Sardar Patel would have made a better prime minister. He for one, would not have allowed Gandhiji's killers to stay free, and foment trouble in the republic. Have you read his letters on culpability of RSS and need to ban the organization?

from:
charvak

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 03:59 IST

Sardar Patel in a public meeting in Junagadh on November 11, 1947 offered Kashmir to Pakistan."Our reply (to Pakistan) was that one could agree to Kashmir if they agreed to Hyderabad." What will Mr Narendra Modi's explanation on this? Or his frenzied suporters'?

from:
Nityananda Ghosh

Posted on: Oct 30, 2013 at 00:46 IST

Mr.Modi's comment on Patel is unnecessary in the Govt.Function that too with the PM. The single incident itself reveal the quality Mr.Modi possess.His aim and objective is not the improvement of the country.He wants to divide/create controversy among the people of the country without knowing the History of the country.The speech of the PM shows his maturity and the understanding about our mother nation.

from:
K.Shanmuga Sundara Raj

Posted on: Oct 29, 2013 at 23:01 IST

Isn't this simply STUPID to discuss especially at this juncture about what Sardar Patel, who was gone 60 years ago would have done? This shows both these Indian leaders have no clue about what is THE MOST IMPORTANT thing for the nation today and it's future. The greatest threat to the nation is from none others than its leaders.

from:
Raj

Posted on: Oct 29, 2013 at 22:45 IST

Its a great regret that innocuous program of open Sardar Patel memorial has turn into political battlefield.Instead of lauding Sardar Patel's contribution Mr Modi choose to politice it.Same has been seen while Independence day.Its disheartening to see that Mr Modi lacks understanding of the nature of the event.Its hard to claims Sardar Patel's legacy in spreading lies and creating confusion

from:
Vishal Potekar

Posted on: Oct 29, 2013 at 22:44 IST

It must be said that in terms of pedigree, the BJP is simply no match for the Congress which has a great political history and has produced leaders recognised not only in India but the whole world. It is obvious that the BJP and the RSS are aware of this handicap and are desperately trying to portray Sardar Patel as a proponent of Hindutva so that Modi can latch on to this myth and adorn the mantle of Sardar Patel number 2!

from:
Sohail Zahid

Posted on: Oct 29, 2013 at 22:21 IST

The movement of freedom struggle crowned Jawaharlal as first PM because of the sacrifice he has done to the country. Mahatma Gandhi asked Pt.Jawaharlal to become the PM and he OBliged. The same Mahatma was murdered by RSS man . To day Modi the RSS man hearing about Jawaharlal and his family become jittery. What India is to day is because of his vision.

from:
M Rajendran

Posted on: Oct 29, 2013 at 22:17 IST

â(Mahatma) Gandhi, (Jawaharlal) Nehru and Sardar Patel and Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad had a strong faith in the countryâs unity. They had secular and liberal approach, sympathetic towards the poor. They were tolerant and respected different ideologies,â These were the words spoken by the PM on the dais of the occasion. Immediately he says âAll those present here will agree that those were such ideals which are lacking in the country today,â he said.
That is what the country says and repeated by Mr. Modi. So, Mr. MMS / PM himself has agreed that they are not Gandhians of congress but Gandhians of nehru family.

from:
kasthuri rangan

Posted on: Oct 29, 2013 at 22:08 IST

Yes. He was secular and ought to be as such. But he was totally opposed to any sort of appeasement. He handled the Hyderabad question firmly and succeeded in integrating the State with Indian union. But Nehru with his pro Muslim outlook would not have done this. Even take the question of Somnath Temple rejuvenation. Patel headed the committee that decided to rejuvenate the Temple and the Temple got rejuvenated notwithstanding the uneasiness on the part of Nehru. Nehru handled Jammu and Kashmir and we lost 1/3 of J.K. Nehru handled China affairs and we lost Tibet and subsequently huge part of India. He brought in PDA to tackle the communist menace. All these things done by secular leader. Today the Govt at the centre and states are afraid to take action terrorists. illegal immigrants etc all in the name of Secularism. Surely the secularism of Patel and the Congress led by Nehru does not match.

from:
Vasudevarao

Posted on: Oct 29, 2013 at 21:58 IST

âFriends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears; I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him; The evil that men do lives after them, The good is oft interred with their bones, So let it be with Caesar ...â
Mark Antony in William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar.

Genius of Shakespeare is glaringly visible in analysing the human nature. The great contribution and sacrifices made by Pundit Nehru for the country cannot be denied. Unfortunately because of frailty of human nature people of India will only remember the evils of the Nehruvian socialistic license permit raj perpetuated on the nascent country effect of the economic disaster haunting the country even today. I will consider that Nehruâs unbelievable inability to recognize the free market economic visionary genius of Rajaji was an astounding failure of statesman ship. India lost decades of economic progress due Nehruâs infatuation with Soviet command and control economic dogma.

from:
N.G. Krishnan

Posted on: Oct 29, 2013 at 21:17 IST

All the leaders in the past had worked hard for India but today"s leaders are working hard for self only.

from:
kvenkataramam

Posted on: Oct 29, 2013 at 21:17 IST

I think the government should rather focus on what could someone do rather than what someone could have done who is ofcourse a great leader but now mo more.

The potential threat to Indian economy is not what politicians say, but representing all Indians as if they had heard each of our voice. It is hilarious still to see them mentioning how could they listened us when they hardly had heard us? We would like India to see the number one in economy with effective leaders driving toward that direction and not lamenting on the pasthood or others good deeds.

from:
Hari

Posted on: Oct 29, 2013 at 20:19 IST

What to do when people start pitting one national leader (nation builder) against the other for cheap publicity. This only shows their utter disrespect towards our freedom struggle and the formation of India itself. All the leaders had their respective roles in the movement, and stating that one leader was better than the other would only demean the stature of our whole recent history.

from:
Ipsit Acharya

Posted on: Oct 29, 2013 at 20:01 IST

He is too regionalistic and dumb to make these comments. His comments about Sardar Patel would've made country different shows his mindset and he is no different. I wouldn't trust this guy to take the country forward.